Hypothetical question about calories and carbs

IIRC...

In an ideal metabolism, the first 100g or so of protein would be used
for your daily protein needs. Up to 58% or so of the rest would be
converted to carbs, and any excess converted to fat and stored. The
actual numbers are more complicated, because the conversion from
protein to carbs is moderated by blood glucose levels; when you make
enough carbs the conversion slows down. The conversion would have
stopped long before you had a surplus of carbs.

However, this is a mostly hypothetical question. I've heard way too
many people complain that they can't eat *enough* protein, me
included, to think that this is a common problem. Normally, when you
can't store any more protein, your stomach stops passing it along. If
you kept eating anyway, you'd eventually vomit it back up.

Now, it's quite easy to eat too much fat. Eat more fat than you need
for daily calories, your body just stores it, low carb or not.

Similarly for carbs. Eat more than you need, your body converts the
excess to fat and stores it.

"johnb41" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hypothetical question: Lets say i need 2000 calories to "maintain" my
current weight, and all I eat is lean chicken breast. I eat so much of
it that the total calories in one day is 3000 or 4000, BUT my total
carbs is very low... say, 20. (making this up). If this was done
regularly, would I gain weight? Or because it's still very low carb
(and also low fat), i would not gain or even lose weight?

I would think that if you ate 4000 Cal of lean meat one day, you may feel
too full to eat the next day. If you do this regularly, or rather every day,
you may get a condition called "rabbit starvation". Apparently the condition
feels like you are totally stuffed, but continue to eat more because you
feel like you are starving. Doesn't sound all that pleasant.
I don't know if doing this for one day would give some sort of caloric
advantage for that day. One day of lots of lean meat will not likely give
symptoms of rabbit starvation either.

Quoted message said:

I know this is not realistic because i would never go to such an
extreme... i do eat lots of green vegies and have a varied diet. I'm
just curious about this.

(Actually, come to think of it, it does kind of apply to me. At a
buffet a few weeks ago i did stuff myself with lots of low carb food.
The calories probably went off the scale, but i think the carbs and fat
were quite low)

Thanks,
John

johnb41 said:

Hypothetical question: Lets say i need 2000 calories to "maintain" my
current weight, and all I eat is lean chicken breast. I eat so much of
it that the total calories in one day is 3000 or 4000, BUT my total
carbs is very low... say, 20. (making this up). If this was done
regularly, would I gain weight? Or because it's still very low carb
(and also low fat), i would not gain or even lose weight?

You'll gain weight.

The main benefit of low carb is that restricting carbs stops you eating
too many calories.

Also, it's pretty difficult to eat vast amounts of protein. the example
you give would involve eating around 4 lbs of chicken breast meat and
nothing else. That's going to be difficult!

Pete

When i do "buffets" (not often; maybe once every few months) a typical
meal would be:

- 4-5 chicken breasts (skin removed, and picked off the bone)
- 4 slabs of lean fish (don't know what kind)
- Maybe some slices of fresh ham and/or steak
- vegies: green beans, cauliflower
- drink: water or a little diet pepsi

After this i'm actually quite satisfied, and could actually eat more,
but stop because i think the calories are getting too high.

I have no idea how many calories all this food contains, but it can't
be low. Thankfully i only do this once in a VERY long time. So even
if i ate all high carb food, it probably wouldn't affect my weight; my
average day is quite strict.

John

"johnb41" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hypothetical question: Lets say i need 2000 calories to "maintain" my
current weight, and all I eat is lean chicken breast. I eat so much of
it that the total calories in one day is 3000 or 4000, BUT my total
carbs is very low... say, 20. (making this up). If this was done
regularly, would I gain weight? Or because it's still very low carb
(and also low fat), i would not gain or even lose weight?

I know this is not realistic because i would never go to such an
extreme... i do eat lots of green vegies and have a varied diet. I'm
just curious about this.

(Actually, come to think of it, it does kind of apply to me. At a
buffet a few weeks ago i did stuff myself with lots of low carb food.
The calories probably went off the scale, but i think the carbs and fat
were quite low)

Thanks,
John

You will gain weight as others have said. The trick is in the appetite
suppressant effects of ketosis, protein, and fat. You eat less calories,
calories in calories out. If you eat until sateity you should stop well
before 3000 calories, which is a helluva lot of chicken breasts.

Joe the Aroma said:

calories in calories out. If you eat until sateity you should stop well
before 3000 calories, which is a helluva lot of chicken breasts.

Hmmm... 10 cans of canned chicken. Ick. I have a hard time eating
*one* can (300 kcals).

"Bill Eitner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

johnb41 said:

Hypothetical question: Lets say i need 2000 calories to "maintain" my
current weight, and all I eat is lean chicken breast. I eat so much of
it that the total calories in one day is 3000 or 4000, BUT my total
carbs is very low... say, 20. (making this up). If this was done
regularly, would I gain weight?

Yes.

The "magic" of low-carb is in its
anorectic effect. It suppresses
appetite. The "metabolic advantage"
(ability to take in more calories
while still losing at the same rate)
that Atkins spoke of is arguable.

In a word, if you eat like a pig you'll
look like a pig whether it's low-carb or
not.

Also, fat shouldn't be seen as a bad
thing. I know that eating fat to lose
fat seems counter-intuitive, but that
doesn't make it any less effective.
Fat is what produces much of the anorectic
effect that is the largely unsung hero
of low-carb. If you override that by
trying to cut carbs and fat at the
same time, you'll be tempted to overeat
more often.

Nonsense, for me there is no difference except that low fat has less
calories.

johnb41 said:

Hypothetical question: Lets say i need 2000 calories to "maintain" my
current weight, and all I eat is lean chicken breast. I eat so much of
it that the total calories in one day is 3000 or 4000, BUT my total
carbs is very low... say, 20. (making this up). If this was done
regularly, would I gain weight?

Yes.

The "magic" of low-carb is in its
anorectic effect. It suppresses
appetite. The "metabolic advantage"
(ability to take in more calories
while still losing at the same rate)
that Atkins spoke of is arguable.

In a word, if you eat like a pig you'll
look like a pig whether it's low-carb or
not.

Also, fat shouldn't be seen as a bad
thing. I know that eating fat to lose
fat seems counter-intuitive, but that
doesn't make it any less effective.
Fat is what produces much of the anorectic
effect that is the largely unsung hero
of low-carb. If you override that by
trying to cut carbs and fat at the
same time, you'll be tempted to overeat
more often.

A more accurate term for what really
makes low-carb effective would be
"anorectic advantage" rather than
"metabolic advantage". Low-carb (with
adequate protein and plenty of fat) is
like having virtual weight loss surgery.
In the end, in either case, you lose
weight because you eat less because
you're not nearly as hungry.
--

johnb41 <[email hidden]> wrote:
|| Hypothetical question: Lets say i need 2000 calories to
|| "maintain" my current weight, and all I eat is lean chicken
|| breast. I eat so much of it that the total calories in one
|| day is 3000 or 4000, BUT my total carbs is very low... say,
|| 20. (making this up). If this was done regularly, would I
|| gain weight? Or because it's still very low carb (and also
|| low fat), i would not gain or even lose weight?
||
|| I know this is not realistic because i would never go to such
|| an extreme... i do eat lots of green vegies and have a varied
|| diet. I'm just curious about this.
||
|| (Actually, come to think of it, it does kind of apply to me.
|| At a buffet a few weeks ago i did stuff myself with lots of
|| low carb food. The calories probably went off the scale, but
|| i think the carbs and fat were quite low)
||
|| Thanks,
|| John

Hypothetical Answer: You would get fat... :-)

--
"If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to be a
horrible warning." -- Catherine

"Joe the Aroma" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Bill Eitner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

johnb41 said:

Hypothetical question: Lets say i need 2000 calories to "maintain" my
current weight, and all I eat is lean chicken breast. I eat so much of
it that the total calories in one day is 3000 or 4000, BUT my total
carbs is very low... say, 20. (making this up). If this was done
regularly, would I gain weight?

Yes.

The "magic" of low-carb is in its
anorectic effect. It suppresses
appetite. The "metabolic advantage"
(ability to take in more calories
while still losing at the same rate)
that Atkins spoke of is arguable.

In a word, if you eat like a pig you'll
look like a pig whether it's low-carb or
not.

Also, fat shouldn't be seen as a bad
thing. I know that eating fat to lose
fat seems counter-intuitive, but that
doesn't make it any less effective.
Fat is what produces much of the anorectic
effect that is the largely unsung hero
of low-carb. If you override that by
trying to cut carbs and fat at the
same time, you'll be tempted to overeat
more often.

Nonsense, for me there is no difference except that low fat has less
calories.

It may be nonsense for you, but for many, many others with metabolic issues
that's exactly how it works. And it's not really magic, though for many it
seems like a miracle.

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Joe the Aroma" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Bill Eitner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

johnb41 wrote:
> Hypothetical question: Lets say i need 2000 calories to "maintain" my
> current weight, and all I eat is lean chicken breast. I eat so much of
> it that the total calories in one day is 3000 or 4000, BUT my total
> carbs is very low... say, 20. (making this up). If this was done
> regularly, would I gain weight?

Yes.

The "magic" of low-carb is in its
anorectic effect. It suppresses
appetite. The "metabolic advantage"
(ability to take in more calories
while still losing at the same rate)
that Atkins spoke of is arguable.

In a word, if you eat like a pig you'll
look like a pig whether it's low-carb or
not.

Also, fat shouldn't be seen as a bad
thing. I know that eating fat to lose
fat seems counter-intuitive, but that
doesn't make it any less effective.
Fat is what produces much of the anorectic
effect that is the largely unsung hero
of low-carb. If you override that by
trying to cut carbs and fat at the
same time, you'll be tempted to overeat
more often.

Nonsense, for me there is no difference except that low fat has less
calories.

It may be nonsense for you, but for many, many others with metabolic
issues that's exactly how it works. And it's not really magic, though for
many it seems like a miracle.

I've always had a hard time dealing with the high fat intake of a low carb
regimen... now that I cut down on saturated fat and tried to use mono and
cut down in general, I'm doing much better. Initially I thought that you
were right, but as it turns out, I have approximately the same hunger levels
from regular and low fat protein source, in the same quanities.

This is probably not true for everyone, but it's true for me.

"Joe the Aroma" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Joe the Aroma" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Bill Eitner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> johnb41 wrote:
>> Hypothetical question: Lets say i need 2000 calories to "maintain" my
>> current weight, and all I eat is lean chicken breast. I eat so much
>> of
>> it that the total calories in one day is 3000 or 4000, BUT my total
>> carbs is very low... say, 20. (making this up). If this was done
>> regularly, would I gain weight?
>
> Yes.
>
> The "magic" of low-carb is in its
> anorectic effect. It suppresses
> appetite. The "metabolic advantage"
> (ability to take in more calories
> while still losing at the same rate)
> that Atkins spoke of is arguable.
>
> In a word, if you eat like a pig you'll
> look like a pig whether it's low-carb or
> not.
>
> Also, fat shouldn't be seen as a bad
> thing. I know that eating fat to lose
> fat seems counter-intuitive, but that
> doesn't make it any less effective.
> Fat is what produces much of the anorectic
> effect that is the largely unsung hero
> of low-carb. If you override that by
> trying to cut carbs and fat at the
> same time, you'll be tempted to overeat
> more often.

Nonsense, for me there is no difference except that low fat has less
calories.

It may be nonsense for you, but for many, many others with metabolic
issues that's exactly how it works. And it's not really magic, though
for many it seems like a miracle.

I've always had a hard time dealing with the high fat intake of a low carb
regimen... now that I cut down on saturated fat and tried to use mono and
cut down in general, I'm doing much better.

why are you doing much better?

Initially I thought that you

Quoted message said:

were right, but as it turns out, I have approximately the same hunger
levels from regular and low fat protein source, in the same quanities.

I think that's the wrong comparision to make. Cutting the excessive carbs
is what normalizings BG in metabolically challenged people, not simply
eating fat.

Quoted message said:

This is probably not true for everyone, but it's true for me.

If that's so, you don't really need LC....you can use a so-called balanced
diet like 30/40/40 or whatnot.

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Joe the Aroma" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Joe the Aroma" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
>
> "Bill Eitner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> news:[email hidden]...
>> johnb41 wrote:
>>> Hypothetical question: Lets say i need 2000 calories to "maintain"
>>> my
>>> current weight, and all I eat is lean chicken breast. I eat so much
>>> of
>>> it that the total calories in one day is 3000 or 4000, BUT my total
>>> carbs is very low... say, 20. (making this up). If this was done
>>> regularly, would I gain weight?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> The "magic" of low-carb is in its
>> anorectic effect. It suppresses
>> appetite. The "metabolic advantage"
>> (ability to take in more calories
>> while still losing at the same rate)
>> that Atkins spoke of is arguable.
>>
>> In a word, if you eat like a pig you'll
>> look like a pig whether it's low-carb or
>> not.
>>
>> Also, fat shouldn't be seen as a bad
>> thing. I know that eating fat to lose
>> fat seems counter-intuitive, but that
>> doesn't make it any less effective.
>> Fat is what produces much of the anorectic
>> effect that is the largely unsung hero
>> of low-carb. If you override that by
>> trying to cut carbs and fat at the
>> same time, you'll be tempted to overeat
>> more often.
>
> Nonsense, for me there is no difference except that low fat has less
> calories.

It may be nonsense for you, but for many, many others with metabolic
issues that's exactly how it works. And it's not really magic, though
for many it seems like a miracle.

I've always had a hard time dealing with the high fat intake of a low
carb regimen... now that I cut down on saturated fat and tried to use
mono and cut down in general, I'm doing much better.

why are you doing much better?

Felt better.

Quoted message said:

Initially I thought that you

Quoted message said:

were right, but as it turns out, I have approximately the same hunger
levels from regular and low fat protein source, in the same quanities.

I think that's the wrong comparision to make. Cutting the excessive carbs
is what normalizings BG in metabolically challenged people, not simply
eating fat.

Quoted message said:

This is probably not true for everyone, but it's true for me.

If that's so, you don't really need LC....you can use a so-called balanced
diet like 30/40/40 or whatnot.

No I eat LC, I just try to eat lean protein. I'm doing very, very well.

x-no-archive: yes

Roger Zoul said:

If that's so, you don't really need LC....you can use a so-called balanced
diet like 30/40/40 or whatnot.

Um, Roger?

May wanta run those numbers again... :-)

Susan

johnb41 said:

Hypothetical question: Lets say i need 2000 calories to "maintain" my
current weight, and all I eat is lean chicken breast. I eat so much of
it that the total calories in one day is 3000 or 4000, BUT my total
carbs is very low... say, 20. (making this up). If this was done
regularly, would I gain weight? Or because it's still very low carb
(and also low fat), i would not gain or even lose weight?

I know this is not realistic because i would never go to such an
extreme... i do eat lots of green vegies and have a varied diet. I'm
just curious about this.

There's a hidden assumption yo're making that a calorie is a
calorie is a calorie and so eating 500 calories of protein and
fat are interchangible. It ain't so.

Each type of macronutrient eaten triggers a set of hormone
feedback loops in the body. It's those hormones that cause the
loss. Carbs trigger insulin (supresses fat withdrawal from
storage). Fat triggers glucagon (causes fat withdrawal from
storage). Protein triggers a whole complex of activities.

Basically if you drive towards low fat you're minimizing
glucagon and therefore only using the minimum caloric burn
to get rid of stored fat. For the same total calories eaten
more fat and less protein means more loss.

There's also the fact that Atkins assures against weight
gain but Atkins forbids overeating. 4000 calories of chicken breast
is definitely overeating so it isn't Atkins.

"Susan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

x-no-archive: yes

Roger Zoul said:

If that's so, you don't really need LC....you can use a so-called
balanced diet like 30/40/40 or whatnot.

Um, Roger?

May wanta run those numbers again... :-)

Susan

Yeah, 30/40/30 or whatnot 🙂 I can't remember which is which, either. 🙂

"Joe the Aroma" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Joe the Aroma" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
>
> "Joe the Aroma" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> news:[email hidden]...
>>
>> "Bill Eitner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>> news:[email hidden]...
>>> johnb41 wrote:
>>>> Hypothetical question: Lets say i need 2000 calories to "maintain"
>>>> my
>>>> current weight, and all I eat is lean chicken breast. I eat so much
>>>> of
>>>> it that the total calories in one day is 3000 or 4000, BUT my total
>>>> carbs is very low... say, 20. (making this up). If this was done
>>>> regularly, would I gain weight?
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>> The "magic" of low-carb is in its
>>> anorectic effect. It suppresses
>>> appetite. The "metabolic advantage"
>>> (ability to take in more calories
>>> while still losing at the same rate)
>>> that Atkins spoke of is arguable.
>>>
>>> In a word, if you eat like a pig you'll
>>> look like a pig whether it's low-carb or
>>> not.
>>>
>>> Also, fat shouldn't be seen as a bad
>>> thing. I know that eating fat to lose
>>> fat seems counter-intuitive, but that
>>> doesn't make it any less effective.
>>> Fat is what produces much of the anorectic
>>> effect that is the largely unsung hero
>>> of low-carb. If you override that by
>>> trying to cut carbs and fat at the
>>> same time, you'll be tempted to overeat
>>> more often.
>>
>> Nonsense, for me there is no difference except that low fat has less
>> calories.
>
> It may be nonsense for you, but for many, many others with metabolic
> issues that's exactly how it works. And it's not really magic, though
> for many it seems like a miracle.

I've always had a hard time dealing with the high fat intake of a low
carb regimen... now that I cut down on saturated fat and tried to use
mono and cut down in general, I'm doing much better.

why are you doing much better?

Felt better.

Interesting. You don't tolerate sat fat but you do tolerate fat?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Initially I thought that you

Quoted message said:

were right, but as it turns out, I have approximately the same hunger
levels from regular and low fat protein source, in the same quanities.

I think that's the wrong comparision to make. Cutting the excessive
carbs is what normalizings BG in metabolically challenged people, not
simply eating fat.

Quoted message said:

This is probably not true for everyone, but it's true for me.

If that's so, you don't really need LC....you can use a so-called
balanced diet like 30/40/40 or whatnot.

No I eat LC, I just try to eat lean protein. I'm doing very, very well.

Nothing wrong with limiting fat to limit calories. I don't find any problem
with sat fat, though.

"Doug Freyburger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

johnb41 said:

Hypothetical question: Lets say i need 2000 calories to "maintain" my
current weight, and all I eat is lean chicken breast. I eat so much of
it that the total calories in one day is 3000 or 4000, BUT my total
carbs is very low... say, 20. (making this up). If this was done
regularly, would I gain weight? Or because it's still very low carb
(and also low fat), i would not gain or even lose weight?

I know this is not realistic because i would never go to such an
extreme... i do eat lots of green vegies and have a varied diet. I'm
just curious about this.

There's a hidden assumption yo're making that a calorie is a
calorie is a calorie and so eating 500 calories of protein and
fat are interchangible. It ain't so.

Each type of macronutrient eaten triggers a set of hormone
feedback loops in the body. It's those hormones that cause the
loss. Carbs trigger insulin (supresses fat withdrawal from
storage). Fat triggers glucagon (causes fat withdrawal from
storage). Protein triggers a whole complex of activities.

Basically if you drive towards low fat you're minimizing
glucagon and therefore only using the minimum caloric burn
to get rid of stored fat. For the same total calories eaten
more fat and less protein means more loss.

Apparently monosaturated fat stimulates glucagon more than saturated and
polysaturated fat.

Quoted message said:

There's also the fact that Atkins assures against weight
gain but Atkins forbids overeating. 4000 calories of chicken breast
is definitely overeating so it isn't Atkins.

x-no-archive: yes

Roger Zoul said:

"Susan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

x-no-archive: yes

Roger Zoul said:

If that's so, you don't really need LC....you can use a so-called
balanced diet like 30/40/40 or whatnot.

Um, Roger?

May wanta run those numbers again... :-)

Susan

Yeah, 30/40/30 or whatnot 🙂 I can't remember which is which, either. 🙂

40 carb, 30 fat, 30 protein. Those are Zone ratios. They add up to
100%. :-)

Susan